IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No. 848 of 2017

Khan Muhammad……….………………………...…………………..Applicant

Versus

The State…………………………….……………..……………….Respondent

Date of hearing and order : 26.07.2017

Mr.Qaim Ali Memon, advocate for applicant

Mr. Zafar Ahmed Khan, Addl.PG

O R D E R

FAHIM AHMED SIDDIQUI, J: This order will dispose of instant bail application moved on behalf of the applicant Khan Muhammad son of Sain Dad who is facing trial in a case registered vide Crime No.69/2017 at PS Garden Karachi under Section 9-C Control of Narcotic Act, 1997.

Allegation against the applicant is that during routine patrolling, he was apprehended on spy information and from his possession, 02 kilograms charas was recovered.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the applicant is a first offender and a young man as such he deserves a lenient view. He contends that no private witness was associated by police at the time of arrest and recovery. It is alleged that charas was kept by the applicant for the purpose of sale but no name of purchaser has been mentioned in FIR. He has relied upon a case reported as 2000 PCrLJ Karachi 657.

Learned APG opposes instant bail application. According to him, the grounds of first offender and young age are not applicable under any provision of Section 497 Cr.P.C. He submits that these grounds may be considered by trial Court at the time of sentence and at bail stage, these grounds are not considerable. Regarding non-association of private witnesses, his contention is that as per the provision of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, association of private witnesses is not necessary.

I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the applicant and learned APG and gone through the relevant record as well as case-law cited by learned counsel for the applicant. The applicant was arrested with 02 kg narcotic and it cannot be considered that such a huge quantity was kept for the purpose of consumption. Looking such quantity of narcotic, it may be attracted that applicant was keeping the same as trader or carrier. Contentions of learned APG regarding first offender and young age as well as non-association of private witnesses bear weight as such these grounds are not applicable at the time of consideration of bail application. As far as the case-law cited by learned counsel for the applicant is concerned, the same pertains to the year 2000 and such offences are increasing in the society so also the same is a serious offence against the society as such the case-law is not applicable being distinguished as to the facts and circumstances of the instant case.

With these observations, instant bail application is dismissed. However, trial Court is directed to pace up the trial and conclude the same as soon as possible.

J U D G E